The Transgendered Achilles’ Heel & OPEN THREAD

A Chicago man accused of sexually assaulting three young girls told prosecutors he considered himself a boy in a man’s body, according to Cook County court documents.

Joseph Roman, 38, is charged with predatory criminal sexual assault stemming from repeated attacks on three girls who were 6 to 8 years old at the time, according to prosecutors. Roman was a friend of the girls’ families at the time of the attacks between 2015 and January of this year.

During a hearing Wednesday, prosecutors said Roman admitted to some of the attacks and told Chicago police “he is a 9-year-old trapped in an adult’s body.” He was ordered held without bail.

This story highlights the logical conundrum liberals face when they attempt to assert rest/shower/locker room access for transgender persons. Joseph Roman claims to be a boy, even though he’s a biological adult. If society accepts his minor-status claim, authorities will have to justify charging a boy as an adult in order to impose stiffer penalties for his assaults. Moreover, though minors cannot legally consent to sex, they are not sent to juvenile hall for “consensual” sex. What should happen if this “boy” has “consensual” sex with a girl? Consistency dictates we treat him no differently than biological boys.

Recall that there are few, if any, government-level standards requiring proof that one is genuinely transgendered. In other words, all a person has to do is merely claim to be male or female. There are no time, dress, or medical requirements. A person may enter an opposite biological sex facility whether s/he looks like Marilyn Monroe or John Wayne. The Left insists that biology should not determine access, and they equally insist that everybody accede to that claim by using the pronouns corresponding to the same. Lacking biological or medical standards, the door is open for everybody.

Back to the Joseph Romans of the world. If a man must be accepted as a woman on his claim that he is a she, and if we cannot appeal to biology, time or lifestyle, on what basis can we reject Roman’s claim? If he claims to be a boy, why shouldn’t we accept it? Why would biology be decisive in his case and not a transgendered person’s?

The obvious answer is that Roman’s claim should be rejected precisely because he is a biological adult. If psychologists certify that Roman is convinced he’s a child, then Roman clearly has a mental defect and needs to be kept away from children. Roman’s feelings are subordinate to public order and safety. Similarly, if a man is merely pretending to be a woman in order to get free looks in the locker room, he should be arrested. However, on what basis do we legally decide who’s pretending? A person with whom I was debating said that “ogling” should be a crime, but he would not define what that means. And if a man genuinely thinks he’s a woman, he has a mental defect that needs treatment. We don’t need to violate everybody’s privacy rights to assuage mentally defective persons, especially since they comprise an extreme minority. In other words, it’s a solution in search of a problem.

Separate rest/locker/shower rooms were created to preserve privacy—something liberals used to believe in. The privacy rights of the vast majority should not be trashed to satisfy a policy that exposes women to every pervert in the land.